Simply means he is paying for school. Or at least not getting athletic monies for scholarship. Maybe Poindexter can be a contributor long term - who knows? Tony has never had one that he’s played in the rotation for more than a game or 2. - At least since 2013.
3 Likes
It means you are highly highly highly highly (etc.) unlikely to be a significant player on a decent high major team. You sometimes see it (Justin Bean, Utah St, is having a yuge season), but it’s very rare.
1 Like
I technically was a walk-on at a D2 school because I had all tuition and board covered by grants and academic scholarships - so I didn’t need any athletic monies - except of course for the “huge” daily per diems for food. 
6th man most of my tenure.
1 Like
What do folks think we need to do in the ACC to put ourselves in a position to make the tourney? I was spit-balling, and I think it’s something like this:
- 14-6 → very good chance of getting in
- 11-9 → very little chance of getting in
- In between: details matter (e.g., did we go 12-8, but beat Duke and only lost on the road and ran up our computer numbers a bit)
Assume we win both remaining noncon.
EDIT - as I think about this a bit more, 15-5 might be the upper bound.
3 Likes
Honestly idk if 14-6 is gonna cut it, assuming we win whatever number of games in the ACCT we’re expected to win based on seed, that would put us at 10 losses in a very down year for the ACC. I think we’re gonna need it to be in single digits to be firmly off the bubble
Edit: yeah
3 Likes
14-6 will cut it. They aren’t leaving out any team that goes above .700 in a power conference. Probably wouldn’t leave out a 14-6 team from the ‘lower high major’ leagues like the American and A10.
1 Like
22-10 with no statement OOC wins and a down ACC sounds very bubbly to me.
Syracuse has an absolute knack for that stuff, and has made it multiple times off the bubble despite going like 20-13. In theory they don’t do it with statement OOC wins, but in 2019 they beat Ohio State (which was having a pretty mediocre season itself, but there was some name value) and in 2018 they beat Maryland OOC (also having a down year but had some name value) plus that was in the midst of the ACC being a powerhouse of a conference making Syracuse’s conference record look better. Heck, in 2018 they made it despite going 8-10 in the ACC.
A lot of it’ll depend on how other bubble-grade teams do. If the stars align wrong and we lose our first ACC tournament game, 14-6 might not be enough. If we alternate between 2 point losses and 20 point wins and make the ACC finals, while lots of other bubble teams have a tough time, then 11-9 would probably be good enough.
1 Like
Just gotta avoid additional bad losses, starting tonight
2 Likes
Y’all really must’ve tuned out the selection process the last 8 years if you genuinely think 14-6 in the ACC might not get us in and aren’t just being worry warts.
1 Like
To be fair, it’s 14-6 in the 21-22 ACC. The 20-game schedule in this ACC is an anchor. (Ban the 20-game schedule. Stream the blue-white game. Read my lips – that’s my platform)
2 Likes
Yea but go look at how they’ve handled Pac 12 over the last decade. They will put 4 ACC teams even if the media is kicking and screaming it isn’t deserved. 14-6 and we will be one of those 4.
Edit: okay my memory is off. They actually have stuck the Pac 12 with 3 bids in the past. Maybe before the game tonight I’ll go back and look at the records of Pac 12 teams those seasons.
2 Likes
Pitt - W
@ JMU - W
Farleigh Dickenson - W
Clemson - W
@ Syracuse - L
@ Clemson - W
@ UNC - L
VT - W
Wake - W
@ Pitt - W
@ NC State - W
Louisville - W
@ Notre Dame - W
Boston College - W
Miami - W
@ Duke - L
Georgia Tech - W
@ VT - L
@ Miami - W
Duke - L
FSU - W
@ Louisville - L
I could see something like this being fairly probable. This would probably get us in but we might be sweating a little depending on how we do in ACCT
1 Like
Maybe if we win all of those games by 1 point and as a result are in the 60’s in metrics. Those wins and losses with a NET of even 40 and we are safely in.
I think we may still need help: like Providence needs to be good and Navy needs to be Quad 2, or at least not Quad 4. (I guess this all gets way too speculative this early …).
1 Like
Maybe but that’ll work itself out. Only been through the Pac 12 so far but since the quad system was implemented no team that went 12-6 (18 game schedule) or better was left out of the NCAAT. Some 11-7 teams were first four or NIT. 12-6 in a 18 game schedule is closest to 13-7 in a 20 game schedule.
I’ll stick with 14 being the magic ‘no need to worry about anything’ number. 14-6 in the ACC and we are good. 13-7 and we most likely are in unless we somehow manage to get that record while having a terrible Q1&2 record (certainly possible). 12-8 or worse and it becomes tricky based off who the wins and losses are against.
1 Like
After 9 games my preferred rotations:
Beekman, Murray, Milicic, Gardner, Caffaro. (2 shooters in M’s) - More length and athleticism at the 1-3 offsets Caffaro’s lack of hops and quickness.
Clark, Franklin, Milicic, Gardner, Shedrick. (2 shooters in Clark and Milicic). Less size at the 1 and 2 is offset by Shed’s length and athleticism.
Mix in McCorkle at the 2 in either group - allows Murray to play both at the 2 and 3 as needed.
Do not mix in Stattmann anywhere but practice.
2 Likes
I don’t really disagree. Our starting 5 might be our best defensive 5 and might also be, at the moment, the 5 individual best players on the team. But there’s a strong argument to be made that our starting 5 isn’t our most effective 5.
In fact, while those 5 probably aren’t literally our worst offensive grouping, they’re close (replacing Kihei with Pointdexter would probably accomplish that, though I’m torn on Caffaro vs Shedrick). They’re all individually useful offensively, its just that they have massive negative offensive synergy with each other.
Its quite the conundrum, because Murray and Milicic have shown flashes and are coming along, but they also clearly aren’t there yet. If we’re tied with 3 min to go vs JMU, I’m honestly unsure which 5 guys I’d want on the floor. Well, I’d want Shedrick for his defense, and probably not Stattman, but beyond that it’d be entirely down to who was playing/matching up with the other team well.
1 Like
https://stats.ncaa.org/selection_rankings/nitty_gritties/22483
First net rankings are out. We sit at 70. Got some work to do folks!
At least we’re ahead of FSU lol
5 Likes
Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t like any of our two-true-big lineups (any two of papi, Jayden, Shed). They are lane cloggers on offense and can’t guard any perimeter-oriented 4s. If we give Igor his minutes, I think he will be better at guarding elite 4s (65% chance that elite 4 will be perimeter oriented) in March than Jayden (I think) and Papi or Shed (not even a question). And on offense, it seems more like a no-brainer to me. Unless we can get Shed to show off more of his perimeter skills, but so far we are not doing that.
Strongly agree, though as I note above, I’m not convinced it’s our best defensive lineup (though I think I’m mostly alone on “thanks for coming Jayden, because you are giving us a chance to make the tourney, but I don’t really think you can be a very good ACC player” island).
I really like that presentation, this year. I think that’s new, right? I also tend to think those Iowa and Navy losses are going to bleed down a quadrant each (Iowa to Quad 2 / Navy to Quad 3).
Stab at my favored base lineup:
Kihei OR Reece
Franklin
Murray
Milicic
Shedrick OR Gardner
That gets you to 7. I’d have Papi as a deep sub at the 5. To give the non-OR guys a rest I’d mix between some two-big and some two-PG lineups (but CERTAINLY not both at the same time, because we have all seen how awful that is) and some Carson. (I think there’s a theory out there that continues to gain credence that we spoiled Casey by playing him too much too soon, but I don’t believe in that theory which is why I don’t see any downside in playing Taine/Igor for 20+ or so). I think my lineup is basically a bubble team but it’s a bubble team that (1) I prefer watching over our actual bubble team, and (2) builds for the future (both for March 2022 and for the 22-23 season).
1 Like
I concur about Milicic more at the 4 with a big. I guess I have literally no hope of that happening more than a handful of minutes per game so I didn’t include it.
I also wish Beekman and Clark would combine for no more than 50 minutes per game. And yes the 2 M’s for 20m a game at least and the other M for 10.
1 Like